Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Deleting Posts/Incoherent conversations left in place

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Deleting Posts/Incoherent conversations left in place

    Lately I have noticed all of Reality's posts have been getting deleted. My issue is that the conversations are much less coherent and relevant when a post is in response to one that get's deleted afterward. I do not know the complexity of the coding for the forum, but here is my proposed solution, and maybe there are others. At the very least, if a post is deleted by the user, can we leave a message in place that says a post was deleted?

  • #2
    FYI, as far as I can tell, Reality is doing his own deleting for the most part, at least for the last few months. In case that was not clear.

    Regards

    Comment


    • #3
      Yes, as a moderator, I can confirm that Reality is deleting his own posts. I don't know if this is a feature Ron might want to disable, but I don't think it's ever been an issue with anyone else on this site.

      Over at restoringforeskin.org, it was happening much more frequently, so the owner finally decided to prevent users from editing their comments. It makes sense to me.

      Comment


      • #4
        I am sorry you feel so beset upon, Reality. My comment was meant to clarify, as the way you stated it did not seem to answer the question in the OP explicitly, so I was giving the OP my insight. I have not seen any indication of the conspiracy you seem to see. But perhaps I am missing the signs....

        Regards

        Comment


        • #5
          Ok, so I get that Reality is deleting his own posts, that's not really my main concern. The point of my suggestion is not to criticize the content of anyone's post or the right for them to be able to delete it. But if I open up a thread and there are three posts in a row by the same person and they don't logically connect without the other side of the conversation, it becomes less coherent. I think the point of this forum is to have an open discussion of ideas, and if someone doesn't like your comment that is for them to decide.

          I maintain my original suggestion of some sort of indication that there was a post deleted.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Reality

            3. If you read through this thread, you'll find that it reads coherently, despite the fact that I've deleted several posts so far, in which all kinds a shit happened
            As someone who just opened this thread for the first time, I'd argue against this point.

            That being said, I also think people should be allowed to edit their posts.

            Comment


            • #7
              Reality, in answer to the question in your second deleted comment: the reason I confirmed that you've been deleting your own posts was to clarify that none of us admin types has been doing it. Other forum readers aren't able to see any deleted post at all, nor the username of who deleted it. They just see an apparent discontinuity in the conversation. Try logging out and reloading this thread to see what I mean.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by z726 View Post
                Reality, in answer to the question in your second deleted comment
                Having to start the post like this should be evidence of my point.


                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Reality
                  What in this thread is incoherent conversation, either in part or in the flow of posts? The OP made a suggestion, was answered by admins, which the OP then responded to. That's the heart of the conversation. My deleted comments haven't gotten in the way of that conversation.

                  The post by greg_b addressed to me is the only bump, and in no way interferes with OP and admin responses. In other words, no incoherence between those parties when they replied to each other, or when a reader reads those replies. And the funny thing is, his post to me could easily be read as an unprompted post. So even in that regard, thread flow carried on.

                  Deja posited a particular type of fragmented thread which doesn't exist on this site. Yes, there may be a gap here and there (in a multitude of posts), or some quoted and now deleted posts (where no information is lost), but the overall flow is there, the coherence is there, and anyone can read through any of the threads on this site and understand the points made. So you have to ask yourself, why did he use that particular example, if it doesn't exist?

                  The deletion and/or censorship of posts is the potential cost of doing business on a forum. You seem to accept that fact. Sounds like he isn't used to that.



                  I have quoted your post only for the purpose of giving my comment context after you delete it. Since you have deleted everything else in this thread, why should I assume you will not delete this one. Rather than simply commenting on a topic, the current solution for maintaining context within a conversation is to quote everything so it does not disappear.

                  I could argue your heated comments had become the heart of the conversation. However, I never even saw your heated comment, so how would I know what it is about. What we see is greg apologizing to you about some comment that doesn't exist. Yes, it is possible he is commenting about an unprompted post, but that is highly unlikely. We can assume you made a comment here and not somewhere else.

                  If the fragmented thread doesn't exist, what prompted me to make this suggestion in the first place? I don't spend my time looking for inconsistencies in conversations to then suggest to someone how they should run their website.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I highly recommend that when posting we all echo enough of the idea that we are responding to so that our response has context.

                    I recommend that we all remember the people who read this forum are deserving of respect. If people want to fight there's facebook, reddit, etc. A forum like this provides a useful searchable knowledge base.
                    -Ron Low
                    [email protected]
                    847 414-1692 Chicago

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      My thoughts are... if you say something and regret it, then leave the regretful post up as a lesson to yourself to think it over more thoroughly before you post next time. The criticism and/or bans/deletions you get will force you to constantly improve your thinking and your communication skills.

                      And I agree about fragmenting conversations... if you participate in a conversation, you owe it to the other guys to leave your comments in there. I've seriously considered deleting/cropping some of my posts when I regretted what I said or was proven wrong in a debate, but chose to leave it as-is because it would feel like pulling the rug out from under everyone if I just delete my mistakes and pretend they didn't happen.

                      P.S. I didn't know Reality was deleting his own posts... thought they were being taken down, and I had mixed feelings about that because I hate censorship. But if he's doing it himself, then it's not a censorship issue but a personal issue, which is totally different.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Good points, well spoken. I will only add that if you post something and then later feel it could have been worded better, you can always add additional posts letting others know what you really meant to say, retract what you feel you should not have said, etc. I have done that many times. I think of it as part of good communication and building trust.

                        Regards

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Reality


                          ........................

                          The issue isn't "incoherent conversations", it turns out to be one of truth.

                          If the example you described isn't real (it isn't, it's a stalking horse), and no real example was "worth (your) time", then one wonders why you made your suggestion.

                          I'm replying for this reason: you used my screen name in association with a false example, implying that I caused that example. That's all I care about in all of this, so please don't do that in the future.

                          ............................
                          I apologize if using your name has caused some sort of ill will. I can go edit my posts and take your name out of it if it really bothers you. It was not meant to be a personal attack in any way.

                          If you would really like me to go digging for examples to show you I can do that, but that is really not where I was intending this to go.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X